Hillary supporters - please justify regime change

[tecelote]

Hillary believes regime change is important. You may be fine with killing innocent people to bring Democracy to their country but I believe we need to focus on America.

Hillary said we can not afford Bernie's proposals but she supports regime change. She is being craven and immoral to ignore the many lives that will be lost for her desire to topple other countries governments.

Bernie is not perfect but he will improve the lives of millions and save the lives of tens of thousands of people by keeping Hillary away from the helm.

Please tell me, why this is important to her. I believe I know. Profits. I just don't want to believe we are that far gone.

[Agschmid]

1. Unrec.

[Wilms]

2. Glad you agree that Regime Change is not recommended.

I mean, given what we should all know by now. Right?

[Uncle Joe]

65. Apparently democracy wasn't recommended in Honduras when Secretary of State Clinton worked

Last edited Fri Jan 1, 2016, 09:21 AM - Edit history (1)

to get rid of it, of course the chaos and violence which ensued contributed to the stream of women and children sneaking across our border.

Hillary had a humane answer for that U.S. instigated crisis as well.

That's regime change for you.

[Juicy_Bellows]

3. Your results -

On Wed Dec 30, 2015, 11:16 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Hillary supporters - please justify regime change
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251960166

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

OP offers Lies based on his bias.
Paragraph is absolute lie, offered up with nothing but bias to back up the poster's accusation.

Poster believes the only possible reason is profits. This is also a flat out lie, a broadbrushed attack with little knowledge of what he's talking about.

This OP is a statement of lies, broadbrush.
Inflammatory OP statements offering nothing to back up the statement of absolute lies.
Hide


You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Dec 30, 2015, 11:25 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: CT--needs to be posted in creative speculation. I guess. Plus I don't dig calling a Democratic candidate "craven and immoral"
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No Fly Zone actually does equate to regime change. Its a valid question.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I read the OP as an opinion with a question attached - not hide worthy.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation:
We are going to have to start calling these things escaped truth alerts

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[tecelote]

5. Thanks for posting. The critique is invalid.

Hillary said regime change was important during the last debate.

She also said we could not afford Bernie's proposals earlier in the debate.

I think regime change is wrong and immoral. That's my opinion. Many people here may disagree.

I just want to know why?

---

Here's the debate:

[Juicy_Bellows]

9. There are large differences on some important issues between Clinton and Sanders.

I agree with you but there are some ardent, dug in supporters that aren't interested in debate. I cannot answer your question as to why, I have my suspicions but they are only that, suspicions.

If someone has a good answer I'd love to hear it. I think you are more likely to get deflection and dismissal - I think it's a valid question for what it's worth.

Regime change - the replacement of one administration or government by another, especially by means of military force.

I don't know if a definition is needed but maybe some don't know what regime change means?

Cheers.

EDIT - went back and watched a bit and O'Malley makes good sense here too. FWIW.

[tecelote]

15. I just went back. It was good.

He would be my second choice after Bernie.

[emulatorloo]

4. I've watched all the debates. Neither HRC or Bernie are proposing regime change

Both propose building coalitions of middle eastern countries to take on ISIL on the ground. Both propose air support from the US.

There were some differences in their comments, but many were just calling the same thing by a different word.

So IMHO you are misrepresenting what both Bernie and HRC said.

[tecelote]

6. 56:00

She sounds powerful but, as Wilms points out, I haven't seen any success worth the costs of lives lost.

You may disagree.

[emulatorloo]

8. Thanks for the link. Please avoid putting words in my mouth about the loss of human lives

[BlueCheese]

13. Thank you for this even-handed response.

[sabrina 1]

36. Hillary is a supporter of 'selected' regime change. She supported it in the disastrous invasion of

Libya, once a relatively stable African nation, now a failed state.

She supported it in Iraq, once a relatively stable ME nation, now a failed state.

She has admitted to supporting regime change, she is supportive of it in Syria, again. Despite the failures in Iraq and Libya.

So it isn't an argument, she has been clear about her views on regime change.

What I would like to know is why ANY American particularly Democrats, think they have the RIGHT to intervene in the business of other nations.

The sheer arrogance of such a mindset is stunning.

We've seen it before throughout history, but this nation was founded on ending Colonialism, not promoting it. When did it get to the point where the country became an Empire with Imperialist views in both parties? Who appointed us king of the world?

[tecelote]

46. +1...

"What I would like to know is why ANY American particularly Democrats, think they have the RIGHT to intervene in the business of other nations. "

[sabrina 1]

84. Facts are facts, Hillary does support Regime Change, not sure why anyone is denying it. And we have

no right to do this. I thought all Dems were on board with this, but over the past few years it looks like some have changed their minds? Was it just when Bush did it? For some, apparently so!

[tecelote]

86. "We have no right to do this." Exactly.

American Imperialism. It's a Neo-Liberal thing.

I also thought all Dems were on board for this.

[Live and Learn]

83. +10,000 nt

[tritsofme]

96. Is Sanders also a supporter of "selected regime change"?

Sanders did vote to make regime change in Iraq the official US policy.

[sabrina 1]

97. Sanders voted against both the 1st and 2nd Iraq Wars. So no, he isn't. He voted to support the

troops, as did Kerry who also voted against the 1st Gulf War. Which is why Sanders has the full support of Iraq/Afghanistan/Vietnam Veterans.

I hope that answers your question.

[tritsofme]

99. But Sanders also voted to make regime change in Iraq official US policy

Specifically:
It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.

Politicians are often inconsistent, NBD.

[840high]

103. 10

[Oilwellian]

45. Hillary Clinton: US Must Defeat ISIS And Assad At The Same Time

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/clinton-wants-to-take-out-assad-and-isil-together

Taking out Assad would be a regime change. It was a bone of contention between Sanders and Clinton in the debate. Sanders is calling for the removal of ISIS, NOT Assad. He understands the chaos that would follow.

This is one of the more basic differences between the two campaigns.

[Art_from_Ark]

100. Why is it that most of the targets of Middle Eastern "regime change"

are secular governments where women have/had more rights than women living under theocratic governments?

[c588415]

7. according to you, we should bury our heads in the sand while dictators like Assad gas

his own people. As a Clinton supporter, I agree with many of Mr Sanders views on bettering our country;nevertheless, he appears shaky on foreign policy. The United States is a world leader who has always stood up for those who cant defend themselves, in most cases. Clinton has shown that she is ready to lead. And Clinton is not afraid to call out tyrant's such as Assad, and that's why she has my vote. With that said, only a centrist will win the presidency in 2016. Clinton is left of center;whereas, Sanders is left of left.

[Maedhros]

31. There is mounting evidence that the Syrian gas attack was a false flag operation

Last edited Fri Jan 1, 2016, 03:47 PM - Edit history (1)

perpetrated by Turkey:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/23/hersh-vindicated-turkish-whistleblowers-corroborate-story-on-false-flag-sarin-attack-in-syria/

By now the &quot Insert Target Here) has (weapons of mass destruction/committed genocide/used chemical weapons)" casus belli should be recognized as the propaganda that it is.

It was claimed that Saddam Hussein had WOMD, and that was proven false - yet gullible Americans still cling to it as fact, because it makes them feel better about the multitude of collateral deaths that resulted from "regime change."

It was claimed that Gaddhafi committed genocide, and that was proven false - yet gullible Americans still cling to it as fact, because it makes them feel better about the multitude of collateral deaths that resulted from "regime change."

It was claimed that Assad used chemical weapons, but it looks like that was a false claim - yet gullible Americans still cling to it as fact, because it makes them feel better about the multitude of collateral deaths that will result when we attempt "regime change."

[TheFarS1de]

79. Surely not...

Just ask the Russians how trustworthy the Turks are .

[sabrina 1]

38. We DO bury our heads in the sand when it comes to cruel dictators. We are best buddies with some of

the worst dictators in the world and always have been. In fact we have CREATED dictators.

Assad is the business of the Syrian people and we are NOT interested in him because he is a DICTATOR.

Did you also think Bush was only interested in Saddam because he was a dictator?

I truly thought that at least WE knew better than that.

Shame to see people here believing our horrible cruel invasions of other nations has ANYTHING to do with altruism.

[CorporatistNation]

62. Hillary Has A Storied History of Blundering Decisions on Foreign Policy...

Making important decisions based upon how it will improve one's own political standing is irresponsible. Whether it was the vote to invade Iraq, Managing the Libya matter as Secretary of State or calling for No Fly Zones over Syria most recently, the pattern is clear as to Hillary Clinton's priorities.

I have not met one person who thinks that implementing a No Fly Zone in airspace where Russian aircraft are currently operating is a prudent decision. Recipe for starting WWIII? You Betcha!

How did that Iraq invasion turnout?

If, as a nation we are going to pursue such a policy pathway then we better bring back the Draft so that the human sacrifice/cost is shared among all demographics. In contrast to "The Frontrunner," Bernie Sanders has demonstrated a much more mature, objectively based and responsible decision pathway in this area, thus further solidifying my vote for the thoughtful and courageous Senator from Vermont.

[c588415]

82. I never said I agree with a no-fly-zone.

[Fawke Em]

87. I'd like to know how a no-fly zone stops ISIL, as she has claimed.

It wouldn't because, as of right now, ISIL doesn't have an air force. What would our patrolling the air do to ISIL?

What it would do, of course, is create regime change in Syria.

[brooklynite]

10. Okay, I'll bite...

...and I'll frame my response with two points:

1) I've lived in a Dictatorship, and I don't recommend it.

2) I was one of the last tourists in Syria before the pro-democracy demonstrations that led to the crack-down that led to the civil war started.

I'm a strong advocate for freedom and democracy. I'm also smart enough to know that we can't intervene in every country we believe doesn't meet democratic principles. HOWEVER, I do believe that measured engagement in a civil conflict in support of those being killed when striving for democratic reforms is warranted. We didn't become involved in Libya because we didn't like Gadaffi; we became involved because the people of Libya demanded political reform after the Arab Spring movement in Egypt (remember how popular that was here?) and the Government started killing them. Likewise, we didn't try to overthrow Assad in Syria, until indiscriminate bombing and GASSING of civilian targets started. In both cases, despite the suggestion of some people here that our "warmongering" President and SOS are engaging in "endless war" our involvement in both has been very measured.

FWIW - I also supported our role in stopping the genocide in Bosnia, and would have supported involvement in the Rwandan Civil War.

You're entitled to disagree. But unless you advocate isolationism/pacifism (a position that Bernie Sanders does NOT agree with), you need to be prepared to define a threshold at which the "regime change" you disparage is and is not acceptable.

[tecelote]

11. Thanks for the insightful response.

I do disagree. I do not believe in isolationism but I think we have gone too far. The Middle East is a mess and we have been messing with it for years. Bosnia and Rwanda are not in the ME.

I've heard the reasons why we should bomb here, put boots on the ground here but not there, etc. But, I do not see any improvement. I do see continued warfare and the killing of many people who's families are just going to hate us for killing their mother, father, brother or sister.

Our solution perpetuates the problem.

[Dragonfli]

12. We should be off fighting in Africa then, some nasty dictators there.

I am sure you agree by body count alone (not to mention the use of forcefully conscripted children soldiers), our first war to get our war on should be in that continent.

[sabrina 1]

40. Shame you believe the gassing of his own people as the excuse for Syria. That has been proven to

have been done by others. Same thing with Libya, the people of Libya were among the most well off under Gadaffi in Africa.

We are going after these countries because of one thing, same reason Bush went to Iraq, OIL.

And we are best buddies with some of the worst Dictatorships in the world.

See Karamov of Uzbekistan eg. A truly brutal dictator who HAS committed genocide against his own people yet we are FINANCING him.

We didn't intervene in Rwanda because there was no benefit, OTHER THAN humanitarian, for the US.

And how about the Saudis? Is there a more brutal regime than the Saudis?

Nothing the US does is for humanitarian reasons in living memory.

We CREATE and SUPPORT dictators when it suits us no matter what they do to their own people.

We've had some wonderful dictator buddies, Pinochet eg, who we protected from the war crimes prosecution he so richly deserved.

We need to mind our own business, which is getting steadily worse for most Americans, and always does for citizens whose governments act like Empires.

Colonialism is what we are practicing in those nations who have resources we want. Otherwise dictators are not a concern for this country.

[brooklynite]

49. I could suggest that you're taking your anger at the Bush Administration...

...and blaming the Obama Administration for exactly the same thing.

But I'll just leave you to stew in your conspiracy theories.

[sabrina 1]

59. I don't stew, I work to try to change things that are wrong. A little projection there perhaps.

I notice you were unable to refute a word I said. Are we best buddies with Karamov, the Saudis, Bahrain, another brutal dictatorship whose own population has been rising up against their oppression for several years now, but we are making it very hard for the people by supporting another brutal dictatorship.

If you want to make a point, refute the information rather than make meaningless statements about other people. Credibility is earned, mainly by stating facts on a regular basis, and/or refuting false information. Since you refuted nothing, my facts stand.

[brooklynite]

60. I can't imaging any information source I could provide that you wouldn't categorize as...

"corporate" or "neocon" media. So I won't

[sabrina 1]

64. IS Bahrain an ally of he US? If you can provide a link from anywhere denying that, I will accept it

IS Saudi Arabai and ally of the US?

IS Uzbekistan an ally of the US?

IS Qatar an ally of the US?

Was Pinochet an ally of the US?

Did Kissinger engage with Pinochet in the commission of War Crimes?

Why is a Democratic candidate so close to a man who is wanted for questioning regarding those undoubted War Crimes?

You didn't refute the information, and there is way, way more, because it the information cannot be refuted it is FACT.

The US has and continues to align themselves with some very nasty people whose own people are suffering horribly under their oppressive regimes.

Our support for those regimes makes it very difficult for the people to deal with those dictators

Why do we do this while claiming to be 'saving' people from dictators? THAT IS WHAT needs to change. And that is why people like Bernie Sanders gained so much support so quickly

[farleftlib]

61. Well said

Libya was a wealthy, oil-rich, secular nation that owed nothing to the IMF or World Bank. When Gaddafi announced he wanted to trade Libya's oil in dinars, rather than US dollars, he suddenly had to go for "humanitarian" reasons. Same as Saddam. It was a war crime and Hillary pushed and pushed for it until she finally got her way. Disgusting.

[840high]

104. Thank you 1

[brooklynite]

107. UPDATE: Bernie Sanders said that Assad gassed his own people in tonight's debate

I guess he's just not as smart as you are?

[Scuba]

14. I'd settle for some democracy right here in Wisconsin!

[tecelote]

16. Yes.

How can every vote count if we can not verify it?

Or, if many are disenfranchised of their votes?

[msongs]

17. ask bernie, he keeps voting for funding to support it nt

[tecelote]

18. Listen to the debate. Big difference.

Bernie is not a Dove but he is much more restrained than Hillary.

I am not anti-military. Quite the opposite. I believe our military can be a force for good. As mentioned by brooklynite, Bosnia and Rwanda were humanitarian.

The Middle East is different. I see a lot of profit, a lot of taxes spent and mismanaged and a lot of death but very little success. Afghanistan is our longest running war in history. This is not a good use of our military but it is making many rich.

[tazkcmo]

80. Bosnia.

When I returned from Oil War I, I was disgusted at our slow response to the Bosnian humanitarian crisis. Sarajevo, fresh off of hosting the winter Olympics, was leveled. Even my 10 year old son (RIP) commented, "If only they had oil, huh Dad?". He was right.

[NCTraveler]

19. Sanders is by no means some anti-regime change guy.

He supported regime change in Iraq in the years before the war. Simple fact. Iraq Liberation Act. It's goal was regime change.

[tecelote]

20. I replied to that point in the post above. #18

[NCTraveler]

27. Iraq Liberation Act wasn't necessarily military funding,

Though that was a part of it. The whole goal of the Iraq Liberation Act was regime change. I do agree with what you have written in post 18.

[beam me up scottie]

21. You keep leaving out the fact he voted against it in 2003. Why so disingenuous?

[NCTraveler]

25. I don't "keep leaving it out."

Including in direct conversations with you. His vote on the IWR was stellar. Unfortunately, he and many others worked to build public support in the years before. It is simply not something that can be denied.

What was the goal of the Iraq Liberation Act and how long before the IWR did Sanders support that goal?

I have never been dishonest about any of this as you suggest. Sanders supported regime change in Iraq helping to build public support in the years before the war. Simple fact.

[beam me up scottie]

26. Link to him "build(ing) public support in the years before the war"?

You keep making that claim but have yet to back it up.

Did he give a speech promoting it like Hillary? Did he lobby other congressmen?

[NCTraveler]

28. I have backed it up with you.

Last edited Wed Dec 30, 2015, 06:16 PM - Edit history (1)

Check your spreadsheet. You keep asking me to do things I have already done. Really poor debate tactic you employ. Just stop. This will be my last reply to you on DU because of this tactic you use.

[beam me up scottie]

29. No you haven't, you said he voted for it and that's it.

Words have meanings, saying he built up public support for regime change is a very specific claim.

If you can't prove it just say so.

[EndElectoral]

58. Obfuscation. A big difference utilizing "military" regime change, than voting to condemn a regime.

[BlueStateLib]

22. Bernie voted for regime change

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/105-1998/h482

[tecelote]

23. I replied to that point in the post above. #18

[beam me up scottie]

24. And voted against it in 2003. Why can't you guys just answer the question?

It's very telling that you resort to disingenuous claims instead of defending your candidate's position.

[uponit7771]

30. So at best he's inconsistent with his voting on this

[beam me up scottie]

32. He knew Bush was lying and what would happen if we invaded Iraq.

Why did your candidate lie to get us into the war?

[uponit7771]

33. Link and quote her "lies" to get America into Bush's stupid war? tia

[beam me up scottie]

35. Sure:

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members...

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well, effects American security.

This is a very difficult vote, this is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction.

[uponit7771]

37. Her repeating intell reports from the Bush admin is NOT "her" lying, at worst it's her being naive..

...which since people now believe that others can be redeemed, she's past.

I'm looking for her stating things you know that SHE knows to be untrue...

tia

[beam me up scottie]

39. No, it was a lie. There were no Al Qaeda members in Iraq.

She parroted the Bush talking points to get us into the war, others knew better and tried to stop it.

[uponit7771]

47. That's a statement and not proof that you know SHE knew the AQ information that was given her was

... a lie.

I'm holding these people responsible for not knowing how inept the Bush admin was after they screwed up 911 already and not be cynical enough to think that people who caged 20,000 Americans would lie about getting us into a war.

Clinton has said she made a mistake which all of the candidates have done in one time or the other during their careers

Regards

[beam me up scottie]

55. Either she knew and lied or she should have known better than to parrot Bush's lies.

She didn't just vote for the war she promoted it, she helped sell it to her fellow legislators and the American public.

And before she finally owned up to the collosal failure it was she bragged about giving the Iraqi people the "gift of freedom":

Hillary Goes Orwellian on Iraq

Hillary Clinton may fancy she opposes the war in Iraq, but she has a funny way of showing it. On Monday night in Austin, she had this to say about what the United States military has done over the past five years:

"We have given them the gift of freedom, the greatest gift you can give someone. Now it is really up to them to determine whether they will take that gift."

There was nothing accidental about this line. She delivered it in response to two Iraq veterans introduced at a town hall meeting at the Austin Convention Center by her friend and campaign surrogate Ted Danson. She liked the line enough that she delivered it again a couple of hours later, at a campaign-closing rally at a basketball arena in south Austin.

"The gift of freedom" is, of course, a curious way to describe an unprovoked invasion and occupation causing hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and leaving just about every aspect of life chaotic and fraught with daily dangers. To then lay responsibility for the mess on the Iraqis -- we did our bit, now you do yours -- is the worst kind of dishonesty, a complete abdication of moral principles. It's the sort of thing George Bush has said to justify his decision both to launch the invasion in the first place and then stay the course -- a course Hillary Clinton has spent many months telling primary and caucus voters she thinks was misconceived from the start.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-gumbel/hillary-goes-orwellian-on_b_89729.html

[uponit7771]

66. We agree then, she "should" have known... an already admitted mistake and its in the past

... seeing her judgement has changed.

Good to go...

Either way, I don't see proof Hillary purposefully lied about her reasons for voting for the IWR

[beam me up scottie]

69. It's not in the past for our servicemen, their families or the Iraqi people.

Maybe they just don't appreciate their "gift".

It only seems like it's in the past for Americans who weren't personally affected by that "mistake".

[uponit7771]

70. In the area of "mistakes" that cost lives none of the candidates can throw a stones. After months

... some candidates supporters still see the person who they support with the credentials to hold boulders

That's not reality

[beam me up scottie]

71. Nice deflection.

The reality is Hillary's a war hawk, it's just one of the many reasons I don't support her.

It's not just Iraq, she's been saber rattling for months but apparently none of that doesn't bother her supporters.

[uponit7771]

72. No deflection just repeat of the "I dont see that much difference between Sanders and Hillary" that

... Hillary supporters have been repeating for a while.

If "mistakes" that cost lives is an important issues I see, based off the facts, that none of the candidates can throw stones.


HRC isn't going to start carpet bombing Moscow... and Sanders isn't a dove either...

Why haven't SBS supporters noticed that they have NOT made a convincing case to politicos or the rest of the dem electorate that HRC isn't Satan?

[beam me up scottie]

73. Now you're dragging out the strawmen.

Anything to excuse her foreign policy blunders I guess.

[uponit7771]

74. She's admitted her Blunders Sanders hasn't, I see her as more workable than Sanders who is

... going to have to live up to a standard that's damn near impossible to meet in regards to what he and his supporters are holding Clinton up to.

In regards to the OP, Sanders wants regime change too...

He's no dove

[beam me up scottie]

75. Sure, you keep telling yourself that.

Some people prefer to downplay the differences while others know the only reason Syria is so fucked up now is because of Iraq.

A war she wholeheartedly believed in and promoted.

[uponit7771]

76. Just looking at the facts, Sanders reasoning for voting against the Brady Bill 123423 times stank...

... and that's not something I have to keep telling myself.

There's no downplaying of the differences...

Yes, there are differences between Sanders and Hillary... but not sooooooo much that it justifies taking a chance...

Found out my brother is a politico also, we never talked politics in detail before... shame... he's pretty well versed....

Says the same thing others on this board have said about SBS and HRC... We're not turning cartwheels about HRC but not going to take the chance on SBS...

[beam me up scottie]

77. A personal anecdote! Well that settles it!

My brother was sent to Ramadi, he doesn't want to take a chance on Hillary either.

Like I said, that war will never be in the past for some of us.

[uponit7771]

78. Began the post with "facts" about Sanders votes, can't see how that was missed.

2 of my cousin were also gunned down needlessly where I used to live... needlessly... these decisions hit home for all of us.

I pray your brother gets home safely and in health

regards

[tecelote]

41. +1

As we all know, there are many other examples of Hillary being a hawk.

[beam me up scottie]

42. I don't know why none of them will just address your op.

They condemn Bernie for his vote but nothing about Hillary.

[uponit7771]

67. I'm for smart calculated regime change... nothing wrong with that... it's just not been smart

... or calculated in US recent history.

[sabrina 1]

105. Would you be in favor of another country coming here should we have a government that say, was

oppressing many of its people, and deciding that we need a 'regime change'?? I'm at a loss to try to figure out where Americans got the notion that they have ANY right to go to other countries and topple governments, replace them with governments THEY decide are best for millions of people without asking. Worse, first installing 'regimes' after toppling DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED govts. see Iraq in the '60s, then deciding to do it again as if all these people who die each time we change our minds, are just inanimate PAWNS in a chess game.

Sooner or later, see history for verification, some nation stronger and more powerful may decide WE need a regime change. How would you react to such an arrogant nation interfering in THIS country?

[uponit7771]

106. Not for those reasons... no.. seeing the overt racism that goes on here someone would've

..attacked already

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. My response would be similar to Lil Missy, sans the obscenities

The only people I felt the need to justify my actions to are my mom and dad.

[tecelote]

44. Vote your conscience.

You owe me nothing.

The people in the Middle East. Well, that's different.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

48. tecelote! Nicely said

Glad I have a chance to say I was wrong about you

https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.M484c872c1c94ebbbd1e75bfc3e128011o0&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300

[tecelote]

50. Thx!

[MADem]

51. The Most Important Regime Change in Recent History....

Happened right here in Jan 2009.

There are lots of ways that regime change can be achieved. Violence does not always have to accompany the effort.

[Thinkingabout]

52. Regime change has been back by Sanders so has he changed

His position on this issue?

[tecelote]

53. Post #18 and #21 show his position.

[Thinkingabout]

56. Yes he supports regime change.

[uponit7771]

68. Those post address nothing, Bernie is for regime change too...

[Proud Liberal Dem]

54. Supporting regime change

And actually doing it can be too very different things. Bill Clinton supported regime change in Iraq and bombed Iraq a few times but didn't invade. I don't know if our support of the rebels in Libya was a great idea in retrospect but I thought we were playing more of a support role rather than unilaterally overthrowing Ghaddafi? Is HRC advocating invasion of some country for the purpose of regime change?

[EndElectoral]

57. Hilary supports military regime change. It is important that the word military is attached.

She wants to freeze middle class taxes. So I ask who will pay for the foreign wars such as taking down Asad she is eager to commence?

[nationalize the fed]

63. This Democratic Rep explains that "Regime change" is unconstitutional and illegal

under international law. Just who the hell does DC think it is running around the world deciding who runs a country. It's outrageous. None of these candidates campaign on "hey lets spend your children's money on getting rid of Assad".

What would Thomas Jefferson say of "Regime change" aka Coup D'etats? What if Russia and China decide to "regime change" DC? What then?

Official House Page: http://gabbard.house.gov/

Casually debating "regime changes" like some highway project shows just how far gone the nation is. Time to emigrate, maybe. Surely if Rodham-Clinton wins.

[sorechasm]

81. Very informative interviews of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard

Thank you ntf!

Rep. Gabbard has best described the risks of regime change in Syria.

[Attorney in Texas]

85. NOTICE: Violent overthrow followed by nation rebuilding will continue until attitudes improve!

[tritsofme]

88. Sanders supported the Iraq Liberation Act, which codified regime change in Iraq as US policy

It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.

So...go justify that!

[tecelote]

89. It's been justified above. Just read.

Read #18, #21 & #63.

Also, listen to the debate. A world of difference between Bernie and Hillary.

[tritsofme]

90. Those posts do not address Sanders support for regime change in Iraq

Sanders voted to make regime in Iraq the official policy of the United States. Your OP and obfuscation do not address that fact.

[tecelote]

91. Listen to the debate. A world of difference between Bernie and Hillary.

[tritsofme]

92. This is a different claim than your OP. Sanders thought regime change was important too

At least enough to vote for making regime change in Iraq the official policy of the United States...

Sorry you find this inconvenient.

[tecelote]

94. No. Bernie does not support regime change in Syria. Hillary does.

Listen to the debate.

That's the difference.

Your references to the past are not relevant here.

Sorry you find this inconvenient.

[tritsofme]

95. The OP refers to regime change generically, Syria wasn't mentioned

OP could have been clearer that Sanders thought regime change was important for Iraq,
but not for Syria.

[Hekate]

93. Other supporters - please justify your accusations. Credible links not optional.

[WillyT]

98. Looks Kinda Like This...

[leveymg]

101. Ask the Israelis and Saudis. It's to their benefit, not ours. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

102. Like justifying the regime change in the ILA, Iraq Liberation Act of 1998

which called for regime change in Iraq, HR 4655, Sanders voted yea.